Tethered by its ideology

Published: Sunday, March 9, 2014 at 6:30 a.m.

Last Modified: Monday, March 10, 2014 at 11:55 a.m.

For four months beginning last October, a special committee appointed by the Marion County Commission met for two to three hours every two weeks and worked on crafting a proposed county ordinance to curb the practice of chaining dogs and leaving them unattended.

The seven-person task force, led by retired sheriff’s Maj. Kerry Crawford, was carefully selected to ensure that advocates for both animal rights and personal property rights were included in the discussion.

The panel considered the practicalities of enforcement, of people’s real life schedules, of the realities of animal cruelty caused by long-term tethering. They looked at tethering ordinances already in place in 13 Florida counties and, as Crawford told the commission during a 15-minute presentation on Feb. 4, concluded that enforcement “begs for a lot of discretion.”

After all that, the panel came up with a proposed ordinance that was approved 6-1 by the panel, which included the heads of the Humane Society and the county’s Animal Services Department.

So when County Commissioner David Moore made a motion to approve the panel’s recommendations at Tuesday’s commission meeting so a public hearing could be scheduled, he was met with stone-cold silence. Moore could not get a second to move the issue forward.

Had the commissioners forgotten the public backlash last August when the issue was originally raised and they refused to consider any action? That outcry was so vociferous it led to the creation of the blue ribbon committee.

Did the commissioners not hear the evidence that dogs left tethered and unattended not only become dangerously aggressive but tend to be neglected and abused?

In an interview with the Star-Banner last month, Crawford explained that the panel sought to draft an ordinance that was “simple, concise and enforceable and addressed the issue of public safety,” adding that “it was the conclusion of this task force ... that the unsupervised, unattended outdoor tethering of a dog should be prohibited.”

Simple and direct. Just what the commission ordered, right?

Apparently not. The commissioners had to be shamed into creating the task force, which put in dozens of hours of work individually and collectively.

Now they are ignoring the advice of their handpicked advisors. Ingrates. No wonder the commission chronically struggles to get people to serve on its advisory boards.

The commission should be ashamed of itself. Quit playing political games — poorly, I might add — with people’s time and talent. If you are not in favor addressing what is clearly both an animal and public safety issue, be men and women enough to say so and don’t pretend you care what your constituents think.

The blue ribbon panel did its homework, crafted an ordinance that is acceptable to animal rights advocates as well as animal control enforcers.

Just as the commission asked. So what’s the problem?

The problem is a tone-deaf commission tethered by its own ill-advised political ideology.

<p>For four months beginning last October, a special committee appointed by the Marion County Commission met for two to three hours every two weeks and worked on crafting a proposed county ordinance to curb the practice of chaining dogs and leaving them unattended.</p><p>The seven-person task force, led by retired sheriff's Maj. Kerry Crawford, was carefully selected to ensure that advocates for both animal rights and personal property rights were included in the discussion.</p><p>The panel considered the practicalities of enforcement, of people's real life schedules, of the realities of animal cruelty caused by long-term tethering. They looked at tethering ordinances already in place in 13 Florida counties and, as Crawford told the commission during a 15-minute presentation on Feb. 4, concluded that enforcement “begs for a lot of discretion.”</p><p>After all that, the panel came up with a proposed ordinance that was approved 6-1 by the panel, which included the heads of the Humane Society and the county's Animal Services Department.</p><p>So when County Commissioner David Moore made a motion to approve the panel's recommendations at Tuesday's commission meeting so a public hearing could be scheduled, he was met with stone-cold silence. Moore could not get a second to move the issue forward.</p><p>Had the commissioners forgotten the public backlash last August when the issue was originally raised and they refused to consider any action? That outcry was so vociferous it led to the creation of the blue ribbon committee.</p><p>Did the commissioners not hear the evidence that dogs left tethered and unattended not only become dangerously aggressive but tend to be neglected and abused?</p><p>Not even a second for the sake of discussion? Really?</p><p>Talk about tone deaf. There are nearly 100,000 households with pets in Marion County. Animal rights issues matter hereabouts, folks.</p><p>In an interview with the Star-Banner last month, Crawford explained that the panel sought to draft an ordinance that was “simple, concise and enforceable and addressed the issue of public safety,” adding that “it was the conclusion of this task force ... that the unsupervised, unattended outdoor tethering of a dog should be prohibited.”</p><p>Simple and direct. Just what the commission ordered, right?</p><p>Apparently not. The commissioners had to be shamed into creating the task force, which put in dozens of hours of work individually and collectively.</p><p>Now they are ignoring the advice of their handpicked advisors. Ingrates. No wonder the commission chronically struggles to get people to serve on its advisory boards.</p><p>The commission should be ashamed of itself. Quit playing political games — poorly, I might add — with people's time and talent. If you are not in favor addressing what is clearly both an animal and public safety issue, be men and women enough to say so and don't pretend you care what your constituents think.</p><p>The blue ribbon panel did its homework, crafted an ordinance that is acceptable to animal rights advocates as well as animal control enforcers.</p><p>Just as the commission asked. So what's the problem?</p><p>The problem is a tone-deaf commission tethered by its own ill-advised political ideology.</p>